Who Is John Galt?
check out the glow for the movies! :)
SOURCE URL: http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/11/who-is-john-galt/
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
this country is to be saved, the homeschooling
movement (or trend) will be instrumental. Not that
all homeschoolers think like us; many are very
religious; but at least, they are not for statist take-
over of the mind.
Great article! The Lord spake!
Flash-back... My Sweet Lord... musical interlude - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qJTJ...
:)
Seriously... I usually like what I've heard from him.
Regards,
O.A.
William Shakespeare
Thanks for finding.
The SSI I matched up with the National Science Foundation.
thank you for introducing me to to this fellow. He is a brilliant man. Do you think the nytimes or fox news will pick up on this article? Doubtful.
frequently with lucidity and, sometimes, great humor on global warming.
I'll certainly re-read AS the next time with a new point of view.
Excellent and needed posted! Five thumbs
If I had seen this before reading the books I would have come away with the fact that the book is 1100 pages and the wrong idea that it's about what he describes in the article. In never would have guessed that it's about the opposite from what he says. I would have thought there's no way I'm getting through 1100 pages of this trash.
For Galt's sake!
The article talks about hot buttons:
- Condemns NASA
- Condemns specific individuals and politicians.
- Talks about rising energy costs (what?) and denies that burning stuff on a large scale for energy threatens the environment.
- Says the repercussions of globalization are caused by a gang of evil people instead of technology.
It's close to the opposite of the book.
Any change in the amount of 'stuff' burned in the sun certainly threatens the environment as it is today.
Will absolutely cause any life on the planet to evolve to accommodate the changes in energy received by the planet.
Rising energy costs. Check your utility bills.
Technology has nothing to do with the 'globalization that he's speaking of. He's talking about globalized government.
I do not understand what this means. Are you saying changes in solar output are responsible for the current period of mass extinction/evolution? This is not correct. The sun's output will slowly increase over 100s of millions of years, but this will not affect human interests and is of no concern.
"Rising energy costs. Check your utility bills."
We've been in a period of cheap energy for decades. I think it will continue. I say that about almost any commodity or basic material. All the value is in stuff we create. I predict oil will not be a large-scale energy source in 100 years, but its price will be similar to today.
"Technology has nothing to do with the 'globalization that he's speaking of. He's talking about globalized government."
A global gov't and the end of the nation state as we know it is happening now because geographical barriers no longer prevent transfer of value and communication. I think different passports, currencies, and languages will fade away over a few hundred years.
Obviously, I'm no Hari Seldon. These are my best guesses as to how history will unfold.
Your idea of what is 'cheap' energy is a strictly subjective and relative measure not related to the cost at the end user, particularly when measured as a percentage of the cost of production or the advantages obtained during the industrial and technological ages of the last century and a half.
As to global gov''t arising naturally from the elimination of geographical barriers--mankind hasn't let geography prevent exchange of value and communication in thousands of years, as demonstrated by the world-wide DNA projects of the last few years. I would think the barrier is more likely the result of people being anthropologically and developmentally different and maybe even incompatible in some cases.
CG: I agree. It's insignificant. Heat is not why burning stuff affects the environment.
Claim: Life will continue and adapt after the current mass extinction event.
CG: Absolutely. Life finds a way.
Claim: "Your idea of what is 'cheap' energy is a strictly subjective"
CG: True, I didn't specify compared to what. I'm saying cheap compared to pre-industrial times when animal power drove civilization. I think we're going in to a post-industrial age where GDP/energy ratio increases.
Claim: Humankind hasn't let geography prevent exchange of value and communication in thousands of years.
CG: This claim seems absurd. I'm probably misunderstanding. I would be interested in learning more.
Globalization of governments will "dummy down" its citizens and culture. Mediocrity will be the mantle for the idealism of socialized globalization. Smart people will adapt and average people will be on the plantation.
Ayn Rand completely understood human nature. Intellect is not equal in all people. Some are simply smarter and more competitive than other. Liberalism assumes all are equal - and the truth is we are not all equal. Galt's Gulch will materialize in one form or another and be a safe haven for the productive citizens. Haves vs have nots will be even more evident than it is today.
People are smarter than ever before. The same technology that makes the world seem smaller (i.e. globalization) contribute that.
"Mediocrity will be the mantle for the idealism of socialized globalization. "
This is a real risk. I think the risk flows more from changes due to automation. People may perceive them as due to globalization. They may respond with socialistic policies that stifle growth.
"Galt's Gulch will materialize in one form or another and be a safe haven for the productive citizens. "
Yes, I agree.
"Haves vs have nots will be even more evident than it is today."
Not necessarily. That may happen, but I see no reason it must happen. In fact, when I was a kid, we had poor countries and rich countries. That's blurring, and some people in poor countries are getting rich by learning to make stuff people want. I do not agree that wealth disparity must increase.